RE: [Leica] Autofocus Leica R

["Kit McChesney | acmefoto" <kitmc@acmefoto.com>]

Adam--

My comments in the [brackets]. ;-)

>I can't believe you guys would actually deign to create this analogy, and
>print it on a piece of virtual paper, for all human beings, regardless of
>ability, to read, and not only that, but to be subjected to:

It wasn't "you guys" it was me.

[Yes, it was you. Indeed. But you expressed the sentiments of a few others
when you did.]

>Point being, no, a blind person cannot see the result of the image he
>creates in the same way that you see it, but at the same time, if you base
>the value of an image on the ability of the artist to see it as you see it,
>or to see the "result" as well as you see it, then I think you are pretty
>darn arrogant.

A blind person cannot SEE it at all - that's the point. The image has no
existence as far as their own senses are concerned. If I shot picturs and
never
developed them the photos on the film have almost, but not quite the same
nature, since I have the memory of the image in my mind. A blind person has
some
other complex mapping of sensory images but they don't involve sight or the
visual. Heat maybe. Sound. Texture.

[I beg to differ that a blind person cannot see, or visualize. Just ask a
blind person. And again, is the blind person's ability to see the product of
his/her work a necessary criteria for the work's being considered art, or
even worthy of being seen by others? If a musician can't hear his or her own
work, does that mean the music isn't music?]

>I'm surprised at how many people who profess to be able to "see" are
>actually quite blind to some of the most fundamental issues about what
>constitutes creativity and creative work. Astounding!
>

On the contrary - it's like a composition comprised of a single rest. It
might
be creative but it ain't music.

[Ever heard of John Cage?]

Kit

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html